[Ambassadors] Poll: Do you agree to merge Marketing List with Ambassador List ?

[Thomas Chung]

On 2/17/07, Patrick W. Barnes <nman64 at n-man.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 15 February 2007, Francesco Ugolini wrote:
> >
> > 1) Do you agree to merge Fedora Marketing List with Fedora Ambassadors
> > List?
>
> -1
>
> I can't emphasize my objections enough.  These are two, separate lists with
> two, separate purposes.  There are reasons that each was created, and those
> reasons are still valid today.  The Ambassadors program is not the Marketing
> program.
>
> I've heard it argued that Fedora is not something to be marketed at all.  It
> is true that Fedora is not a packaged, commercial product, but it is an idea,
> and ideas can be marketed every bit as well.  Even things that are free can
> pursue market share.  If we want Fedora to be put into the hands of people
> that can enjoy its benefits, then we have to make sure that they know about
> it.  That's marketing.
>
> So, isn't that what Ambassadors do?  No.  The Ambassadors are a grass-roots
> effort to deliver Fedora, not market it.  They also serve as a bridge between
> the Fedora Project and the rest of the world.  They serve as a voice and a
> listener for each side, enabling interaction and communication at a level
> unprecedented in open source projects.
>
> Yes, the Marketing and Ambassadors projects are related.  Their work can be
> tied closely together, but they are not the same and should not try to become
> the same.  Marketing needs only to be a low-bandwidth channel, which may give
> the appearance of death or failure, but is actually all the more reason to
> keep it as a separate project.  I'm not saying that Marketing doesn't suffer
> from the same inactivity that plagues many of the other Fedora projects, but
> it still serves a useful purpose.
>
> For more on this, see Karsten's message to the Marketing list.
>
> >
> > 2) FOR AMBASSADORS LIST MEMBERS ONLY: Do you want that the Ambassadors
> > List, if it will be not merged with Marketing List, will be open to all?
> >
>
> -1
>
> My objections to this are much smaller, but I still don't think this list
> should be cracked wide open.  It was created as a closed list to keep the
> signal-to-noise ratio from getting out of hand and to appropriately limit
> this list to serve its purpose.  We need to keep control of this list or it
> will very quickly fall to become useless and may take the entire Ambassadors
> project with it.  I'd be willing to listen to arguments over an open archive,
> but membership should remain controlled.
>
> Giving up on the tennets that created the Ambassadors project will only assure
> its eventual failure.  Don't let that happen.
>
> --
> Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
> nman64 at n-man.com
> http://n-man.com/

All,
I was leaning toward "+1/+1" but after reading Chitlesh, Karsten and
Patrick's reasoning, I'm changing my vote to "-1/-1"
You have until Sunday 18th February 00.00 UTC to vote or change your mind.
Francesco will collect all votes in spreadsheet to count your votes or
make any changes.
I'll make the official announcement of the result Monday evening after
famsco meeting.
Regards,
-- 
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung